Martin Fucking Scorsese
Created on: February 25th, 2007
congratulations marty
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (3.76) | 190 | 10 | 114 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6,617 |
Inbound links:
TVsfrank, you obviously havent seen Infernal Affairs. that movie was completely overhauled, retold and reimagined. its so very very differently acted, scripted, shot, scored. Scorsese never even saw it before he was complete with his own version. Scorsese has not made one bad film. not one. they all have a point and even base level violent ones in the end have a point and a complete story. as for Shakespeare, he could be arguably overrated but saying 'most overated' is pure hyperbole just looking for a Rise and youknow it.
also, Infernal Affairs is 50 minutes shorter than the Departed. the Departed has 40% more movie, and it is not padding. theres backstory and more character development and story wise it is told so much better and clearer. IA is at a breakneck pace and overly confusing at times because it is that rushed. Scorsese took a decent movie and let it breathe, and its that much better for it.
i will say this though, trashing Shakespeare is the wannabe writer's equivolent of the pretentious film school snob who calls Steven Spielberg a talentless hack. you dont have to sing his praises to the world like everyone else but to deny how revolutionary and important and influential he was is just foolish.
Pretty sh*tty. I'm not denying that Shakespeare's works were revolutionary or well made, I just think they were ill-conceived. He was excellent at bringing the fullest out of bad ideas or something to that extent. As far as I'm concerned there are far better stories that have been told, although maybe not as expertly.
I would say the same of Scorcese, he has a unique style and expert execution, but the cow's dry. He tries to make everything gritty and real and shocking, but not everything is that way and it's certainly not the only way to get a point across. He plays people's emotional/irrational side to get points across instead of their intellectual/reasoning side.
Most people DO get bored with Shakespeare because they don't know how to appreciate it. How words are used is the most important thing in writing. Because of the complexity and seemingly "archaic" English words used, most people pass him off as "boring," especially the ones who were forced to read a few of his tragedies in high school.
yeah no kidding. some Scorsese films are genre action pics and theres absolutely nothing wrong with that, and this "reasoning" line seems like utter nonsense. other Scorsese films still have a sense of brutality but have real intellectual and emotional themes - Bringing out the dead turns Taxi Driver on its head and carries on a theme of guilt that runs through even his very different works like Age of Innocence. he's also done historical films like the Aviator and anyone who says Taxi Driver is some Dumbed down shock violence movie doesn’t know anything about anything. Cows dry? Maybe to someone who only watches the genre flicks on a base level. As for Shakespeare I think since so many are forced to read him in high school he isn’t properly appreciated. That you would lump a work like "merchant of Venice" as ill conceived is absolutely ridiculous to me.
@ 2nd post: There are two ways you can change the way people think. You can take advantage of their emotions, or you can present considerable evidence. Scorsese in a way takes advantage of the former. Rather than proving his point logically he throws in a lot of shock to jolt you into getting the message rather than go through the effort of displaying it properly. The sad thing is that in many of his movies it's entirely unnecessary and you would have gotten the point anyway, so it just seems cheap...
...but he has to appeal to the masses so I guess that's the price. Some of his earlier independent works I like more, but I am in no way a film expert and don't consider myself to be one. @ Shakespeare: It is MY OPINION that he's overrated.* His works seem "boring" but it's not just that. The characters are often transparent and the plot lines obvious. There seems to be an awful lot of cliche in there too, but I'm sure that in his time it was nothing of the sort.
well i think thats absolute horsesh*t. in some movies shock is humor, shock is just shock because its a genre film, sometimes its just the bloody truth of contrasting how some people hide the disgusting things they do with another way of life. Scorsese's wide range of films - have you seen King of Comedy for example? show a huge range of character development methods that depend on the purpose of the film. you're dumbing traits of certain known films down to a mischaracterization, Just like many take the opposite route and claim that Spielberg tugs too much at heartstings instead of showing violent truths. In the end they are both generalizations that show complete ignorance to the depth and purpose of their works. Sorry man, you sound really pretentious with this 'emotional/logical' academic breakdown. I actually prefer the gut instinct "I like it/I don’t like it" sh*t over what youre doing here.
I don't really see how you can turn down the emotional vs. rational argument. It's evident, people have only accepted things when you have been able to prove to them that it's worth it, or when you force them to feel strongly about it. Propaganda is used constantly by radical causes because they can't factually support their POVs. Nazis used jews as a scapegoat for the depression in Germany during the 30s. People supported the "final solution" because their anger & desperation had been taken advantage of...
finally, i love how this ytmnd is being taken literally by some as "no hurr he doesnt make the best films in the world i hate you" when really i just like Scorsese, glad he finally wins one after his long career, and that the song is funny to me, claiming to love him while simultaneously expressing it through mob style violence. reading a little deep into a simple ytmnd.
...not because it had been rationally displayed to them that "Jews are evil." Now Scorsese is OBVIOUSLY not a nazi, this is just an example. Also, art is definitely supposed to appeal to the emotions more than anything else, but using the "shock factor" to get across your message always seems cheap to me, like they couldn't do it legitimately. The thing is Scorsese's films DO get it across and the shock factor just seems out of place sometimes.
"I don't really see how you can turn down the emotional vs. rational
argument." because its really f*cking simple - some things are pure entertainment, and some things are meant to be more. The Departed is a smartly made and presented genre film. Trying to only place things with deep emotional resonance above them in worth
is absolute horse sh*t. there is value to the guts and blood, non sequitor spewing pure entertainment in the world. And now you're taking this to some WWII propaganda analogy? Are you high? All this to justify not liking a violent genre flick?
i just really dont see people all upset over some shock factor, but then again, i dont find the violence in his films shocking. the derangement of some of the characters he creates is far more shocking. and again, this emotional manipulation route you're on is way out of hand to compare to a crime story. you act like if people enjoy a film with shock value they will hand themselves over to some dictators slick propaganda. you're turning your argument into tinfoil hat retardation.
You're misconstruing what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying any of Scorsese's films suck in any way, I just disagree with the way some of them are presented. Obviously, if everyone skips away into the sunset at the end, that's not even nearly realistic, but it's obnoxious when people make a point of killing off characters as often as possible to give the film more weight. The point on propaganda was irrelevant to Scorsese, it was a support to my psychological statement.
killing off characters as often as possible does nothing. how they are killed, what is said while they are killed, the way it is shot when they are killed - you build human beings into classic movie monsters, build tension, create an atmosphere where anything can happen, lots of different things. theres a difference between what Scorsese does and what Jason vs Freddy 23 does.
I'm not saying at all that people are going to go out and be deranged because of blood and gore. That's moronic. I'm saying that Scorsese can appeal to people rationally, or emotionally. Blood and gore appeal to people emotionally. Scorsese's films are well-crafted, and sometimes I feel like people would have listened to what so-and-so was saying whether he was bleeding to death or not because the intellectual, thought-provoking content is there already.
Like, take The Godfather for instance; a fantastic movie. Violence was used well in this movie, and shock was used well also. Scorsese does the same thing in his movies, although it feels (to me) like he's killing off Michael at the end of every movie just so people will listen to his closing lines more closely.
listen, theres not many horror films i like and its because in the hands of an incompetent filmmaker they are nothing but hack and slash without any tension built up. sometimes not seeing something is better than the spurt of blood. and if people are watching a violent Scorsese flick and only appreciate the killing, then they're not really an intelligent movie fan. but my point is these films TO ME actually do go the extra mile with the characters and the buildup and the occasional surprise that the Violent payoffs are entirely appropriate and often add weight to the film. In the Departed he made monsters out of characters that in Infernal Affairs seemed tame because the violence was just a touch too restrained. If a moviewatcher is too dumb to appreciate this sort of thing and are only shocked and "emotionally manipulated" in the bad sense (when really being involved in the film should be a good thing) then that's their problem.
I just have this definite feeling that I'm not saying what I have to say right, because I'm sure that we would just respect one another's opinions if I were. So I'm trying to display it from different angles, I'm not trying to perpetuate some pointless argument. I never try to sway people to my way of thinking, I just want them to understand it. If I still seem like I'm being unreasonable then I'll just say f*ck it and forget it.
Mega, again i think you miss the mark. do you remember what happens at the end of GoodFellas - he becomes an 'average schnook' - its a completely different tragedy - he lives a normal life and thats the unhappy ending. in Casino you are led to believe he is killed at the begining of the film when at the end he goes back to his old unglamorous low time mob position. i suggest you actually look at his list of films again and reexamine the purpose of side characters' deaths vs main characters, and note how Often the "michael" actually lives and learns a different more mundane and humble lesson.
i mean even at the end of Taxi Driver - they swerve you, Travis lives and it ends with that completely ambiguous rear view window shot that still has people guessing. you are giving Scorsese far too little credit for so many films, and i think the popcorn genre flick quality of the Departed might be making you misremember his work.
This one is called Martin Scorsese.
He makes the best f*cking films
He makes the best f*cking films
If I ever meet him, I'm gonna grab his f*cking neck and just shake him and say "Thank you. Thank you for making such excellent f*cking movies
Then I'd twist his nose all the way the f*ck around and then rip off one of his ears and throw it like a like a like a f*cking frisbee
I wanna chew his f*cking lips off and grab his head and suck out one of his eyes and chew on it and spit it out in his face and say
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link